Phil: Non-Existing Ego

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/19/2006 3:55:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ADHHUB

writes:

 

> Just on the off chance that it might save you repeating it over and over,

> I've been meditating for 20 years and I've had much the same experiences

> everybody else here has had. As I just mentioned to Marc, I don't generally

> talk

> about them because it's not easy to find the words, and it would be mostly

> ego

> stroking anyway, so feel free to end your campaign to get me to try being

> quiet. Been there, done that for a very long time now. Sometimes folks

> notice

> that one's life outside of meditation doesn't appreciably change through

> such

> practices. This is why such experiences are clung to so tenaciously. When

> you

> can meditate 24/7, then maybe something has been accomplished.

>

> You're free to stop attending to the huge task of feeding ego for the time

> being, but ego does not vanish. There's a hodgepodge of concepts about

> looking

> at mind that can't be seen which clearly stops even though it's entirely

> unconscious, a part of which is ego which doesn't exist but obviously

> vanishes

> cause 'I' can see that it's gone. The conceptual nonsense is also designed

> to

> hold ego in place.

>

>

L.E: Thank you for the information. I appreciate knowing a bit about your

spiritual practise, but no need to feel offended. Just asking. Don't worry

about ego stroking, that's no problem, just relax and be yourself, as ego is a

natural part of that. I don't expect meditation to change anything outside,

it's

within ourselves that counts. Or rather, as ourselves. (I don't see there is

actually an " in ourselves " ); Didn't really mean the ego would permanently

vanish, though it may in a few of us, but that it can subside, diminish, be

reabsorbed into the mind for the meditation period. I have no idea about what

you

mean when you say, " I " can see that it's gone. The " I " is the ego, and when

it subsides there is no one to see it or so it seems to me. As far as

" conceptual nonsense " I have no idea what you mean. Concepts them selves aren't

nonsense they are varous kinds of patterns produced by the brain, or experience

or

other whatever. Standard religions are " conceptual nonsense. " Is that what

you mean? And there's lots of fake teaching that is " conceptual nonsense. " is

that what you mean? And just for the record, I'm not trying to annoy you on

purpose although it may happen on its own, spontaneously.

 

Larry Epston